In 1967, French theorist, writer and filmmaker Guy Ernest Debord (1931 – 1994) published La Société du Spectacle. In this work, Debord states that modern society will develop in what he describes as a ‘society of the spectacle’. In his interpretation, all social life will be dominated by its spectacular representation. The spectacle consists of the images, representations and illusions that determine the way in which individuals define the value of commodities. The perception of people can also be influenced by the spectacle, as people can acquire a certain status. According to Debord, the spectacle will eventually redefine the social relations amongst people as a result of the mediation by images. In his 1988 work, entitled Commentaires sur la société du Spectacle, Debord states that the primary expressions of the spectacle are the images produced by mass media. However, Debord does not provide an explanation on how the influence of mass media on societal life can become as large as the spectacle that he describes in his 1967 work.
This research will focus on the question: If Debord was to add an explanatory factor to his theory about the society of the spectacle, how would he explain the influence of the spectacle on all societal life? Debord often refers to Marx’ theory about alienation and exploitation and he states that those concepts are both present in his interpretation of society. According to Debord, this is due to the influence of the spectacle, mostly as a result of the use of mass media. However, to understand the way in which mass media can have an influence on societal life that is as large as Debords spectacle, Marx’ theory provides insufficient explanation. In addition, the ideas of Michel Foucault are used to provide a necessary explanation. In Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison (1975), Foucault has developed a theory about the way in which unconscious power structures can lead to the self-disciplining behavior of those who are subject to it. Foucault has based his idea on the ‘Panoptikon’ prison design by British philosopher Jeremy Bentham, in which the architecture functions as a ‘guard’ to control the inmates. In the Panoptikon, the inmates are visible for the guards, although they cannot determine whether they are being observed. Therefore, they alter their behavior due to the illusion of constant control.
In the society of the spectacle, the individuals are continuously subject to the spectacular representation of societal life. However, the driving forces behind the spectacle are invisible due to the fact that the spectacle has replaced the authentic representation of commodities and people, and has become a reality on its own. Therefore, the society of the spectacle can be interpreted as a panoptical institution. In this way, Foucault helps to understand the functioning of the spectacle in society, and even elucidates why life in the society of the spectacle resembles Marxist concepts as described by Debord.